Full application for the erection of a new two storey building in order to provide 18 self-contained units for students together with felling of trees protected by a tree preservation order, alterations to existing vehicular access and creation of a new pedestrian access, and associated landscaping.
Local Member: Councillor D. Gwynfor Edwards
Minutes:
Full application for the construction of a two-storey building providing 18
self-contained units for students, felling trees protected by a tree
preservation order, amendments to existing vehicular access together with
creating a new access for pedestrians and landscaping.
(a)
The
Development Control Officer elaborated on the background of the application,
and noted that the application site was located within the residential area on
the outskirts of the city of Bangor.
Members’ attention
was drawn to the tables in the report that indicated the latest situation
(September 2015) in terms of private purpose-built student accommodation
developments in Bangor. It was noted that the information highlighted that not all student
accommodation needs were being addressed by purpose-built student
accommodation. Reference was made to an appeal decision on an application to provide
student accommodation on the former Jewson site, Bangor, where the Inspector
has noted that ‘there was an obvious need to provide more student accommodation
in Bangor’.
It was considered
that a clear need existed for purpose-built student accommodation developments,
and this type of development had the potential of having a positive impact on
the local housing market as it could free up houses of multiple occupation to
be used by local households that needed such housing and that it provided
quality facilities for students and was formally regulated.
It was noted that
the report recommended that the Committee should delegate powers to the Senior
Planning Manager to approve the application subject to signing a 106 Agreement
regarding a financial contribution to improve and maintain an open play area. It
was reported that in order to ensure consistency in relation to applications
for purpose-built student accommodation it was not considered reasonable to ask
for such a contribution as it was believed that the University's sports
provision currently responded to these needs.
Reference was made
to objections received on grounds of road safety, access and increase in
traffic. It was noted that the proposal involved improving the existing access
and four parking spaces would be provided along with turning space for vehicles
within the building’s curtilage. It was added that having received a revised
plan demonstrating the layout of the nearby roads and pavements, the
Transportation Unit had no objection to the proposal.
The development complied with the Gwynedd
Unitary Development Plan (GUDP) for the reasons noted in the report.
(b)
Taking
advantage of the right to speak, an objector noted the following main points:-
·
That she
lived in the listed building opposite the site and was speaking on behalf of
the community;
·
That the
local community was trying to adjust to the student accommodation development
on the former St Mary’s site, and that this development would be a step too
far;
·
That a
number of applications had been submitted over the years for this site, and the
most recent application in 1990 had been refused on appeal due to safety
concerns relating to the access and the impact on the setting of the listed
building;
·
That the
Design and Access Statement submitted as part of the application noted that
access would be gained to the site from Lôn Bopty,
however the access road would be from Bishops Mill Road, namely a steep single
lane road with one turning space.
·
The
changes to the access in Lôn Bopty
would improve visibility to some degree, however it would not improve access to
the site;
·
That the
proposal did not comply with policies CH33 or D19 of the GUDP;
·
Smaller
vehicles were dispatched to collect waste along the road as it was narrow;
·
The
development would affect the setting of the listed building;
·
Should the
application be approved, it would affect the privacy and the peace and quiet of
residents;
·
Lôn Bopty
currently received little natural light, and the development would add to this;
·
There was
a Tree Preservation Order on the site;
·
There were
bats and slow worm present on the site;
·
The
development would not meet the area’s needs.
(c) Taking advantage of the right to
speak, the applicant’s agent noted the following main points:-
·
The
development site was within the development boundary;
·
There was
a need for student accommodation as noted in the Inspector’s appeal decision in
relation to the application for 110-114 High Street, Bangor.
·
That the
number of units had been reduced from 32 to 18;
·
The design
of the building had been revised;
·
The building
would be located at a sufficient distance from the listed building;
·
The
Transportation Unit was satisfied with the proposed access improvements;
·
The
original application had been revised to ensure that the development was
acceptable.
(ch) A member noted that she had received an e-mail
from the Local Member who noted that he had welcomed the development on the
former St. Mary’s site, but that he objected to this development due to the
pressure on the community relating to parking and refuse collection
arrangements. He was of the opinion that
there was no need for more student provision in this area.
In response to these
observations, the Senior Planning Service Manager noted that:
·
there was
clear evidence in terms of the need for purpose-built student accommodation;
·
that the original
scheme had been substantially revised and reduced.
Proposed
and seconded to approve the application.
(d) In response to a comment by a member regarding the need for purpose-built
student accommodation, the Development Control Manager noted that there was a
lack of provision for half of the University’s students.
A member
proposed that the application should be postponed in order to undertake a site
visit as previous planning applications on the site had been refused due to the
site access.
RESOLVED to undertake a site visit.
Supporting documents: